SGF bares its fangs

By Segun Gbadegesin

No one saw it coming as the Southern Governors’ Forum (SGF) drew its line in the sand of national politics penultimate week. How did the forum manage a multiparty, multi-ethnic, and multi religious consensus on a bombshell of diverse policy implications? It’s a miracle of sorts.

Well, maybe not quite. The governors are far behind the people of their zones. They are still farther behind cultural leaders and political activists who have, over the years, through formal and informal showings, underscored the commonality of their concerns and articulated same to the broader national audience. Indeed, the Southern Nigerian Peoples Assembly (SNPA) has been very clear in its presentation and articulating of its concerns not just as southern concerns but also as national concerns.

The Southern Governors’ Communique of eleven paragraphs can be summed up as approximately focused primarily on three issues of national importance and urgency: security, foundation and structure of the nation, and governance matters. To these three substantive issues, they added two methodological approaches, including a presidential address and national dialogue.

Without being presumptuous, one can hazard a guess that the security issue was on the highest list of the Governors and that it facilitated a meeting of minds for the emergence of the forum and its first meeting. It’s not difficult to assume that every governor, regardless of party affiliation, as the in-name-only Chief Security Officer of his state, has been overwhelmed by the tense insecurity across the land. We should give it to them that they are so mindful of their constitutional responsibility that they agree to bury their partisan differences.

But any discussion of security cannot but bring to the table every aspect of our national institution and governance structures which have severally and collectively contributed to the architecture of insecurity that has become our lot. Obviously, a governor who doesn’t have constitutional supervisory authority over the police cannot perform effectively the constitutional responsibility of securing his state. There lies our constitutional conundrum. It is why a discourse on security cannot ignore the issue of, for instance, state police.

However, the issue of policing cannot be treated in isolation, but only as part of the whole issue of the foundation and structure of the nation and an effective federal system of governance. Hence, our Southern Governors logically found themselves making recommendations on these matters. I am almost sure that these are matters that they didn’t take lightly. Those of them who are members of the ruling party must have weighed their contributions in light of their party’s position. And note, for instance, the verbal gymnastic from the Number 1 Senator, tongue-lashing the governors. Unprecedented you say. But it’s a price that these governors hopefully have thought about and remain convinced they are prepared to pay for the good of the nation.

Now, the reactions have been wide and varied. And it would appear that, overwhelmingly, they have been positive. Even within NASS, it appears that the Senate President and Senator Ndume are the outliers. And I am sure that even they would be hard put to fault the governors on some of their recommendations. How can anyone fault them on their recommendation to ban open grazing when even Miyetti Allah has apparently conceded that it is an anachronistic practice and is only asking for government support for ranches and grazing reserves.

ACF under the leadership of Chief Audu Ogbe, former Minister of Agriculture, is also solidly behind a ban on open grazing because they see the practice as not only outdated but also dangerous for food security. As Chief Ogbe, giving credit to Governor Ganduje, has rightly observed, the unhindered intrusion of foreign herders with AK-47 strapped around their shoulders, has been responsible for maiming and killing farmers. Therefore, they cannot be allowed free entry into the country. This is a policy matter for the Federal Government, not states, to handle.

Now, the governors have not been parochial in their thinking. They haven’t presented the matter as a southern problem. Most obviously, it is a national problem. Surely, banditry and cattle rustling wouldn’t be as rampant if our national policy on livestock farming prioritized ranching and grazing reserves that are leased out to livestock farmers. Therefore, while the southern governors are able to identify security concerns in their areas of supervision, their recommendation is of nationwide application.

If the southern governors recommendations on open grazing and security are of nationwide significance and good policy for the entire nation, such that even ACF and Miyetti Allah are supportive, the governors’ recommendation on foundational and governance structures are even more so, and ought to be equally supported.

Every rational analysis of the spate of insecurity has been candid about the need for us to be comprehensive in our efforts to understand and deal effectively with it. Whether it’s Boko Haram or banditry or killer herders, we can only ignore the fundamental challenges of poverty and ignorance at our peril. Boko Haram has superior weapons, no thanks to its international sponsors.

Boko Haram also has the advantage of the ease of recruitment among the poor and ignorant. Poor herders produce future generation of poor herders who are gifted AK47s as they traverse the forest and savannah regions of the nation with all the dangers they face, while their employers feed well and smile their ways to the bank. As long as these poor folks are there to be recruited, military offensive against Boko Haram or killer herders would amount to naught.

Therefore, non-military efforts must be a priority. And these must involve reordering our other priorities so that we focus on human development initiatives which states and local governments are best positioned to initiate and accomplish. But our structure of governance which is decked against the states and local governments isn’t well positioned for this kind of initiatives.

This is what the call for restructuring is all about. And both the North and the South will benefit. This is the message of activists and constitutionalists in the past thirty years. That the Southern Governors forum has lent its leadership voice is a thing of joy. Now, they must link up with the grassroots and cultural leaders with a common strategy to get it done.

It is as clear as day where the South is on these matters. And the governors have certainly hit a winning goal across the region. I have always worried that extreme partisanship on the part of elected officials may stand in the way of getting it right with their constituents. With Southern Representatives and Senators queuing behind their governors, the solidarity is encouraging and should pay huge political dividends.

Not a party to avoid seizing on opportunities, PDP and its governors have thrown their support behind SGF. In a strongly worded Communique at the conclusion of its Ibadan meeting this week, PDP Governors Forum demanded devolution of power to the states and local governments. This is all coming at the opportune time for the survival of the nation. It will be unfair to condemn the PDP position as opportunistic, because the party had endorsed restructuring in 2019 and its presidential candidate was endorsed by southern advocates of restructuring.

APC must now take a stand. Recall that for sixteen years when PDP was in control, restructuring was an anathema, a word that automatically banned anyone from the Villa. But rigidity of position is only natural for inanimate objects, not humans with rational capacity. Now, even former President Obasanjo is singing the tune of restructuring.

Which raises the obvious question: Wither APC? As a party that was the first to place restructuring on its list of “must dos” in 2015, and had a committee report and recommendations on the matter in 2018, what is holding it back now? A progressive party cannot afford to be left behind in the matter of progress.

This newly found momentum must not wane. SGF has a responsibility to meet with its northern counterpart to advance the cause which it has so commendably started. Those highfalutin messages of the imperative of national unity can only go so far without the necessary sacrifice on all sides.